Re: Trans Am E-body roll cage pics?
[Re: TC@HP2]
#1606564
04/13/14 11:00 PM
04/13/14 11:00 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 27,444 So Cal
autoxcuda
Too Many Posts
|
Too Many Posts
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 27,444
So Cal
|
Quote:
Unless you're going for a spot on reproduction of the comp cars, I don't know that I'd want to copy the TA cages exactly. Even post 1970, the kit car program identified alterations that were improvements and a fair amount has been learned since then about about chassis rigidty and improvements. Looking at some of the pictures Barry put up, these cages appear to be pretty limited by the rule set of the day.
One of the biggest highlights in the ensuing years has been discovering the amount flex in the front third of the car and the need to have more rigidity in the firewall/A piller area and rocker area.
I'd agree.
I'd be looking to copy what Kevin Wesley has been doing to his car here: https://board.moparts.org/ubbthreads/show...e=0#Post8073886
IMHO, it's more practical for what I think you intend to do with the car.
|
|
|
Re: Trans Am E-body roll cage pics?
[Re: RylisPro]
#1606565
04/14/14 03:49 PM
04/14/14 03:49 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 1,440 NW Chicago suburban area
Mopar Mitch
pro stock
|
pro stock
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 1,440
NW Chicago suburban area
|
Rylis... I've sat in the Posey and Gurney cars and took a bunch of pics... (even warmed up the engine of the 77 car before a vintage race at Road America!.. ~2012) I'll try to post later.
If I'm correct, I've read that the AAR/T/A were the first TransAm cars to have ever had their roll-cages designed using a computer.
Mopar Mitch
"Road racers and autocrossers go in deeper and come out harder!"... and rain never stops us from having fun with our cars... in fact, it makes us better drivers!
Check out MOPAR ACTION MAGAZINE, August 2006 issue for feature article and specs on my autocross T/A!
|
|
|
Re: Trans Am E-body roll cage pics?
[Re: Mopar Mitch]
#1606566
04/14/14 08:50 PM
04/14/14 08:50 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 27,444 So Cal
autoxcuda
Too Many Posts
|
Too Many Posts
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 27,444
So Cal
|
Quote:
...
If I'm correct, I've read that the AAR/T/A were the first TransAm cars to have ever had their roll-cages designed using a computer.
I remember Bob Tarozzi saying something like that.
It's an uncompromised race car. Nothing compromised for street use. Still 40+ years ago design. I think the biggest looking design differences today would involve the safety aspect.
|
|
|
Re: Trans Am E-body roll cage pics?
[Re: autoxcuda]
#1606567
04/14/14 09:10 PM
04/14/14 09:10 PM
|
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 2,432 NorCal
RylisPro
OP
top fuel
|
OP
top fuel
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 2,432
NorCal
|
Just dropped my car off at the shop to get my cage welded using 1 3/4" .095 wall mild steel tubing. I'm not getting a 70's cage welded as the cage is going to have X bars at the doors since I'm keeping my door structure/windows. I may take the door beams out to save weight though. I was wondering how the cage is going to be tied to the front shock and wanted to get more ideas. I have a heater core in the way though. I saw that Dart Lite's cage and thought it was really cool, just wasn't sure if that shock bracing went through to the rest of the cage or if it just stops at the starfish looking portion of the firewall. I might not get that far as my brake master cylinder is in the way so well see...
|
|
|
Re: Trans Am E-body roll cage pics?
[Re: RylisPro]
#1606569
04/14/14 09:25 PM
04/14/14 09:25 PM
|
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 4,302 Nebraska
72Swinger
master
|
master
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 4,302
Nebraska
|
Just a heads up, SCCA rules state 1.75" .120 wall IIRC.
Mopar to the bone!!!
|
|
|
Re: Trans Am E-body roll cage pics?
[Re: 72Swinger]
#1606570
04/14/14 11:24 PM
04/14/14 11:24 PM
|
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 2,432 NorCal
RylisPro
OP
top fuel
|
OP
top fuel
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 2,432
NorCal
|
Quote:
Just a heads up, SCCA rules state 1.75" .120 wall IIRC.
Took a screen shot off my phone. This is the SCCA GCR as of Feb. 2014 Over 2699 lbs. 1.75 x 0.095 Hopefully I don't have to use 0.120 wall as it would add more weight
|
|
|
Re: Trans Am E-body roll cage pics?
[Re: RylisPro]
#1606572
04/15/14 01:05 AM
04/15/14 01:05 AM
|
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 256 USA
Consulier
enthusiast
|
enthusiast
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 256
USA
|
Quote:
I was wondering how the cage is going to be tied to the front shock and wanted to get more ideas. I have a heater core in the way though. I saw that Dart Lite's cage and thought it was really cool, just wasn't sure if that shock bracing went through to the rest of the cage or if it just stops at the starfish looking portion of the firewall.
There is a lateral bar that comes off the downtube to the backside of the underhood bar and a downtube from that intersection to the floor mount. Makes a nice triangle to tie in the forward section.
|
|
|
Re: Trans Am E-body roll cage pics?
[Re: Consulier]
#1606573
04/15/14 01:10 AM
04/15/14 01:10 AM
|
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 4,302 Nebraska
72Swinger
master
|
master
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 4,302
Nebraska
|
My mentality is its better to err to the big side so your covered. Would suck to have to yank it all out later if your goals change IMO.
Mopar to the bone!!!
|
|
|
Re: Trans Am E-body roll cage pics?
[Re: RylisPro]
#1606575
04/15/14 02:17 AM
04/15/14 02:17 AM
|
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 4,302 Nebraska
72Swinger
master
|
master
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 4,302
Nebraska
|
Im guessing a 20-40 lb difference between .095 and .120. You could weigh a stick of each and do the math. Around here un-cut DOM comes in 20ft sticks, be kind've a pain to weigh though. Edit: Found it .120 is .573 lb more per foot So 20ft of it is a whopping 11.46 lbs more.
Last edited by 72Swinger; 04/15/14 02:23 AM.
Mopar to the bone!!!
|
|
|
Re: Trans Am E-body roll cage pics?
[Re: RylisPro]
#1606577
04/23/14 11:59 AM
04/23/14 11:59 AM
|
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 25,050 Texas
GoodysGotaCuda
5.7L Hemi, 6spd
|
5.7L Hemi, 6spd
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 25,050
Texas
|
Quote:
You guys make a great point, 0.120 it is I wonder how much more it will weigh?
1.75x0.095" wall DOM is 1.679lb/ft 1.75"x0.120" wall DOM is 2.089lb/ft
So if you used two 20' sticks, you'd be looking at a 16.5lb difference. Just a random number on length there..
http://www.onlinemetals.com/merchant.cfm...amp;top_cat=197
|
|
|
Re: Trans Am E-body roll cage pics?
[Re: RylisPro]
#1606582
05/10/14 05:00 PM
05/10/14 05:00 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 27,444 So Cal
autoxcuda
Too Many Posts
|
Too Many Posts
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 27,444
So Cal
|
Quote:
Did you mean something like this? One negative thing is that it would add a bunch of front end weight and that is what I am definitely trying to avoid
No. I wouldn't do that.
The chassis ends at the front K-member bolt. Anything forward of that is just fluff or because the motor is in the way (which it is of course).
So you do what you can to get your structure as close to the front K-member bolts as possible.
|
|
|
Re: Trans Am E-body roll cage pics?
[Re: autoxcuda]
#1606585
05/11/14 01:25 AM
05/11/14 01:25 AM
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 27,444 So Cal
autoxcuda
Too Many Posts
|
Too Many Posts
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 27,444
So Cal
|
IMHO, if you run a tube cage I don't think you need to run the inner fender braces.
Here's a rough sketch idea of mine. Trying to route triangulation into the front chassis box. Trying to resist twist.
I don't think you could run a straight cross bar from the front k-member bolt area to the other side. I'm pretty sure that goes right through the crank pulley.
Last edited by autoxcuda; 05/11/14 05:38 PM.
|
|
|
Re: Trans Am E-body roll cage pics?
[Re: autoxcuda]
#1606586
05/11/14 12:19 PM
05/11/14 12:19 PM
|
Joined: Mar 2014
Posts: 40 upper So. CA
ntsqd
member
|
member
Joined: Mar 2014
Posts: 40
upper So. CA
|
As noted I wouldn't put the X any further fwd than necessary. If there simply isn't room btwn the engine and the radiator for it then fwd of the radiator is the likely only option left. Recall that I said to put the tube intersections where the loads are. That's also what autoxcuda is talking about, feed the K member bolt loads into the tube structure directly. That requires notching into the OE box section or something to get right to the plates that the bolts thread into.
Ideally those bends in the upper tubes would also have a tube running from them to the center of the cowl/dash bar (the "export brace" in Mustang terms), but only if the cowl bar can feed those loads further into the tube structure. I.e. if it too is bent at the center to meet those tubes at the cowl and re-direct the loads to the windshield post tubes, which then distribute the loads throughout the rest of the structure. It's 3 dimensional truss design, think in terms of triangles - anything else will flex.
On a couple drag cars that I've worked on I built a fore/aft engine locator bracket that bolted to the OE engine mounts and had a pretty serious strut that bolted btwn it and and somewhere on the chassis - specifically to stop the plate from bending due to engine inertia.
Last edited by ntsqd; 05/11/14 12:21 PM.
I used to swerve around my hallucinations, now I drive right thru them.
|
|
|
Re: Trans Am E-body roll cage pics?
[Re: jcc]
#1606589
05/11/14 05:25 PM
05/11/14 05:25 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 27,444 So Cal
autoxcuda
Too Many Posts
|
Too Many Posts
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 27,444
So Cal
|
Quote:
Quote:
IMHO, if you run a tube cage I don't think you need to run the inner fender braces.
Here's a rough sketch idea of mine. Trying to route triangulation into the front chassis box. Trying to resist twist.
I don't think you could run a straight cross bar from the front k-member bolt area to the other side. I'm pretty sure that goes right through the crank pulley.
....
Not sure but does any of this tubimg need to meet and dia or thickness requirements since not part of the cage?
Not sure how without any bolted connections, motor could be removed from above. But the design looks solid.
Engine crossbars generally don't have thickness specs. They are not really a safety deal, mostly performance deal.
In the pictures I posted here of the motor plate, that is initial assymbly at the beginning of the season. There are a system of crossbars yet to be bolted on. If you look closely there are small tubes going through the large roll cage tubes. Crossbars (we called it a spider web) bolts to those through tubes.
Yes the crossbars bolt on. And most connections are not bolted with a thru bolt connecting overlapping flanges.
|
|
|
Re: Trans Am E-body roll cage pics?
[Re: autoxcuda]
#1606591
05/12/14 02:35 PM
05/12/14 02:35 PM
|
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 22,695 Bitopia
jcc
If you can't dazzle em with diamonds..
|
If you can't dazzle em with diamonds..
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 22,695
Bitopia
|
Upon further reflection, the 1 of 3 "tweaks" I mentioned, "Three areas I would like to see tweaked, if possible. 1. the short front upper 8"? connector, reduced to close to zero", this one might be a stiffer solution, but likely would have a huge stress concentration, and prone to fatigue and failure, and therefore not an improvement over what you had napkin drawn. Nevermind.
Reality check, that half the population is smarter then 50% of the people and it's a constantly contested fact.
|
|
|
Re: Trans Am E-body roll cage pics?
[Re: RylisPro]
#1606592
06/12/14 07:19 PM
06/12/14 07:19 PM
|
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 2,432 NorCal
RylisPro
OP
top fuel
|
OP
top fuel
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 2,432
NorCal
|
Since I am getting X bars welded in the doorways would it be beneficial to remove the door beams? I hear it would cut out approx. 25 lbs. per side Thanks
|
|
|
Re: Trans Am E-body roll cage pics?
[Re: RylisPro]
#1606594
06/13/14 08:00 PM
06/13/14 08:00 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 1,692 Seattle WA
RichV
top fuel
|
top fuel
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 1,692
Seattle WA
|
Quote:
Since I am getting X bars welded in the doorways would it be beneficial to remove the door beams? I hear it would cut out approx. 25 lbs. per side
Thanks
Are there any vehicles that have a combination of hinges and latches that enables the door to contribute the the chassis stiffness?
|
|
|
Re: Trans Am E-body roll cage pics?
[Re: RichV]
#1606595
06/14/14 12:18 AM
06/14/14 12:18 AM
|
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 22,695 Bitopia
jcc
If you can't dazzle em with diamonds..
|
If you can't dazzle em with diamonds..
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 22,695
Bitopia
|
I took 14? pics 3-12-08 of the mopar e bodies at a Sebring Historic race. The last pic is just for icing, it's the captive spring loaded quickly outlawed lug nut system. And I think cage design has progressed from this era, and in the one with the back seat cooler, you see the 3rd link mounting point interior intrusion.
Last edited by jcc; 06/14/14 12:34 AM.
Reality check, that half the population is smarter then 50% of the people and it's a constantly contested fact.
|
|
|
Re: Trans Am E-body roll cage pics?
[Re: jcc]
#1606596
06/14/14 12:18 AM
06/14/14 12:18 AM
|
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 22,695 Bitopia
jcc
If you can't dazzle em with diamonds..
|
If you can't dazzle em with diamonds..
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 22,695
Bitopia
|
#2
Last edited by jcc; 06/14/14 12:19 AM.
Reality check, that half the population is smarter then 50% of the people and it's a constantly contested fact.
|
|
|
Re: Trans Am E-body roll cage pics?
[Re: jcc]
#1606608
06/14/14 12:32 AM
06/14/14 12:32 AM
|
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 22,695 Bitopia
jcc
If you can't dazzle em with diamonds..
|
If you can't dazzle em with diamonds..
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 22,695
Bitopia
|
Captive spring loaded lug nuts, last one
Reality check, that half the population is smarter then 50% of the people and it's a constantly contested fact.
|
|
|
Re: Trans Am E-body roll cage pics?
[Re: jcc]
#1606610
07/07/14 01:12 AM
07/07/14 01:12 AM
|
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 813 Ontario,Canada
brads70
super stock
|
super stock
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 813
Ontario,Canada
|
Quote:
#12
That would never fly on any modern racecar!
|
|
|
Re: Trans Am E-body roll cage pics?
[Re: RylisPro]
#1606614
07/11/14 11:08 PM
07/11/14 11:08 PM
|
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 22,695 Bitopia
jcc
If you can't dazzle em with diamonds..
|
If you can't dazzle em with diamonds..
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 22,695
Bitopia
|
I see your main rollbar diagnol is the now preferred one piece. Since you are 75% finished, this is a leaf spring or a 4 link rear chassis, because your rear down bars are not to the rear? I also like personally but seldom see it, but a low as possible bar tying both of the bottom legs of the main hoop together, any side impact would without any lower bar would depend solely on the chassis sheet metal floor with a large DS tunnel in the middle, and a bent OEM crossmember, not a lot of protection for the occupants, IMO, and easy to install this additional bar.
Reality check, that half the population is smarter then 50% of the people and it's a constantly contested fact.
|
|
|
Re: Trans Am E-body roll cage pics?
[Re: jcc]
#1606616
07/17/14 12:44 PM
07/17/14 12:44 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 5,385 Pikes Peak Country
TC@HP2
master
|
master
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 5,385
Pikes Peak Country
|
Quote:
I see your main rollbar diagnol is the now preferred one piece. Since you are 75% finished, this is a leaf spring or a 4 link rear chassis, because your rear down bars are not to the rear?
I noticed this too. Perfect arrangement for a coil over conversion, but less than ideal for a leaf spring car that is putting loads in to the rear most part of the sub-frame.
|
|
|
Re: Trans Am E-body roll cage pics?
[Re: TC@HP2]
#2853580
11/30/20 09:58 PM
11/30/20 09:58 PM
|
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 2,432 NorCal
RylisPro
OP
top fuel
|
OP
top fuel
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 2,432
NorCal
|
I see your main rollbar diagnol is the now preferred one piece. Since you are 75% finished, this is a leaf spring or a 4 link rear chassis, because your rear down bars are not to the rear? I noticed this too. Perfect arrangement for a coil over conversion, but less than ideal for a leaf spring car that is putting loads in to the rear most part of the sub-frame. For years I had thought that the roll cage in the `Cuda was built wrong when it came to the rear down tubes. It turns out that my roll cage is built correctly to SCCA specs which is from the main hoop 45° degrees to the wheel wells. I called two SCCA tech inspectors to verify this as well as tubing size specs, etc. Originally that's how All American Racers built the Trans Am cars were down tubes from the main hoop to rear leaf spring perch. What SCCA rules and engineering requires currently is down tubes from main hoop to go at 45° deg down to the wheel wells. That way in a rear end accident it can crumple the rear of the car without transferring additional force through the down tubes into the main hoop therefore not compromising/kinking the main hoop & halo. I also have a fuel cell cage back there to help absorb any rear impact. The reason I brought this thread back from the dead is just to clear up some confusion as I will be tig welding in the cage on the 73 Challenger build. Felt dumb for years thinking my cagebuilder installed it incorrectly when he was actually correct haha! I will also add in tubes that tie in the torsion bar crossmember which "mirrors" it inside the passenger compartment as well as a tube the ties both legs of the main hoop together. I'll get video to document and post it up on our YouTube channel next year. Still have to buy all the tube because I'm broke haha! Not pointing any one person out, just replying to the last post thanks!
|
|
|
Re: Trans Am E-body roll cage pics?
[Re: RylisPro]
#2855622
12/05/20 11:13 AM
12/05/20 11:13 AM
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 1,376 NORTHERN CA
HUSTLESTUFF
pro stock
|
pro stock
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 1,376
NORTHERN CA
|
I would put a bar from top of door bar, attached to main hoop and down rearward to frame rail in front of or next to wheel tub and add torque box. That way all rear end forces go into structure or at least help to stiffen the fronts mounts
"Were in it to win it. Anything less will end up being..... A whole lot of fun doing!!" UNLAWFL RIP UN
|
|
|
Re: Trans Am E-body roll cage pics?
[Re: RylisPro]
#2856260
12/06/20 09:22 PM
12/06/20 09:22 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 5,385 Pikes Peak Country
TC@HP2
master
|
master
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 5,385
Pikes Peak Country
|
I see your main rollbar diagnol is the now preferred one piece. Since you are 75% finished, this is a leaf spring or a 4 link rear chassis, because your rear down bars are not to the rear? I noticed this too. Perfect arrangement for a coil over conversion, but less than ideal for a leaf spring car that is putting loads in to the rear most part of the sub-frame. For years I had thought that the roll cage in the `Cuda was built wrong when it came to the rear down tubes. It turns out that my roll cage is built correctly to SCCA specs which is from the main hoop 45° degrees to the wheel wells. I called two SCCA tech inspectors to verify this as well as tubing size specs, etc. Originally that's how All American Racers built the Trans Am cars were down tubes from the main hoop to rear leaf spring perch. What SCCA rules and engineering requires currently is down tubes from main hoop to go at 45° deg down to the wheel wells. That way in a rear end accident it can crumple the rear of the car without transferring additional force through the down tubes into the main hoop therefore not compromising/kinking the main hoop & halo. I also have a fuel cell cage back there to help absorb any rear impact. The reason I brought this thread back from the dead is just to clear up some confusion as I will be tig welding in the cage on the 73 Challenger build. Felt dumb for years thinking my cagebuilder installed it incorrectly when he was actually correct haha! I will also add in tubes that tie in the torsion bar crossmember which "mirrors" it inside the passenger compartment as well as a tube the ties both legs of the main hoop together. I'll get video to document and post it up on our YouTube channel next year. Still have to buy all the tube because I'm broke haha! Not pointing any one person out, just replying to the last post thanks! Things evolve, roll with the changes, learn new ways to go fast...
|
|
|
Re: Trans Am E-body roll cage pics?
[Re: RylisPro]
#2856538
12/07/20 01:37 PM
12/07/20 01:37 PM
|
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 22,695 Bitopia
jcc
If you can't dazzle em with diamonds..
|
If you can't dazzle em with diamonds..
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 22,695
Bitopia
|
" I also have a fuel cell cage back there to help absorb any rear impact." You put fuel in it? Sorry, I'd be much more concerned about a fuel fed fire ,then any rear crumple zone advantages. "
Reality check, that half the population is smarter then 50% of the people and it's a constantly contested fact.
|
|
|
|
|